Abbianca Nassar’s secondary career — her dual role as a freelance ghostwriter and brand strategist — has not markedly improved or deteriorated due to advances in artificial intelligence. Yet, paradoxically, the rise of this headline-grabbing technology has made her professional life far more intricate. Among her clientele, responses to AI vary dramatically: a portion fully embraces the technology, even going so far as to develop proprietary ChatGPT-based tools to streamline her workflow. Others harbor deep-seated anxieties about even the faintest suspicion of artificial assistance, insisting she revise her writing until every sentence radiates unmistakable human authorship. Nassar herself professes affection for the em dash — a punctuation flourish she has long favored. Unfortunately, ChatGPT shares her enthusiasm, sparking occasional friction with clients who implore her to eliminate it. “They’ll say, ‘Can you stop using that? Just don’t,’ and I have to explain, ‘I’ve always written this way,’” she recounts from her home in London.
Originally trained as a journalist, Nassar transitioned from sporadic freelance assignments to full-time self-employment following her layoff last year. She remains philosophically torn about AI’s arrival: cautiously optimistic that authentic human creativity will retain its irreplaceable place in her trade, yet pragmatic enough to recognize she must adapt to endure. “My greatest fear,” she admits candidly, “is failing to evolve and being left behind.” This tension captures a broader sentiment among freelancers and small business owners who, unlike large corporations, lack the financial cushion to make bold, potentially costly bets on emerging technologies. Nonetheless, they cannot afford denial either; economic survival demands they follow the prevailing currents — currents now driven by a chaotic, technology-centric evolution.
Through extensive discussions with freelancers, entrepreneurs, and academics, a common duality emerges. On one side, artificial intelligence undeniably lowers barriers to entry, empowering small operators to accelerate production and enhance efficiency. On the other, it depresses wages, erodes creative originality, and raises expectations without increasing compensation. Marketing oneself as “AI-powered” can attract business, yet it also pressures independent contractors to deliver more complex outcomes at static rates. Consequently, the modern freelance environment is paradoxical: gaining initial opportunities has never been easier, yet distinguishing oneself amid the swelling competition is more grueling than ever.
The freelance economy itself is immense. Data from Bankrate suggest that one in four Americans now supplements their income through a side hustle, while Upwork’s 2024 report found that skilled freelance professionals collectively earned $1.5 trillion. One such worker, Cody Luongo, a Charleston-based media consultant, entered freelancing after losing his previous role. He describes artificial intelligence as his “constant companion,” aiding him in crafting press releases or refining pitches. For Luongo, AI levels the playing field, allowing him to emulate the efficiency of seasoned experts and confidently navigate unfamiliar terrain. “AI speeds me up so much that I can deliver exponentially greater value to clients without increasing their costs,” he notes. That efficiency delights budget-conscious clients — and benefits him to an extent — but it also complicates the ecosystem as a whole. The same tools that empower him threaten to oversaturate the marketplace and drive down profits. As clients increasingly ponder whether “the robots can do it,” freelancers find themselves locked in competition not only with each other but with intelligent software itself.
Empirical evidence supports these anxieties. Research by scholars at Washington University shows a measurable contraction in gigs overlapping with AI’s strengths: following ChatGPT’s 2022 debut, writing-related freelance jobs on Upwork dropped by 2%, while average monthly earnings declined 5.2%. For creatives working with visuals — designers, illustrators, photographers — the downturn intensified after DALL-E and Midjourney entered the field, with jobs shrinking by 3.7% and income by 9.4%. Notably, losses were steepest for those delivering higher-priced, superior-quality work. As Professor Xiang Hui observes, “High skill and quality no longer shield freelancers from the downturn.” AI’s accessibility allows novices to produce acceptable work, saturating the market with inexpensive, passable alternatives. Although “good enough” remains distinct from “excellence,” the narrowing perceptual gap — coupled with persistent pricing disparities — erodes the advantage of mastery.
This dynamic plays out across disciplines. Nick Loper, founder of Side Hustle Nation, recounts a case from his community: one entrepreneur now sells AI-generated headshots for $29, replacing his wife’s traditional $300 sessions. Clients simply upload selfies; algorithms return polished portraits. Even if the results look uncanny or overly perfect, many customers prioritize affordability over authenticity.
AI, therefore, operates as a double-edged instrument. One public relations professional credits it with broadening her business into event management, enabling her to automate invitations, draft summaries, generate video content, and compile attendance logs while charging premium rates. Yet another marketer laments a deluge of AI-generated job postings and proposals that devalue genuine effort, observing that even a perfectly composed pitch must now compete with algorithmic submissions. Similarly, an Etsy shop owner specializing in spiritual goods — self-described as an “Etsy witch” — despairs at her marketplace’s inundation with AI-produced replicas. Everything, she says, “looks the same,” betraying the mechanical origins beneath their mystical façades. As she bitterly observes, customers seeking “authentic psychic guidance” often receive only its hollow simulation.
In creative trades, dependence on AI remains socially fraught. Studies reveal that when consumers suspect digital intervention, they instinctively devalue the result — regardless of objective merit. Assistant Professor Shane Schweitzer of Northwestern University notes, “People subconsciously assume that work involving AI deserves less credit.” This perception stems from an uneasy cultural divide: while some hail AI as a liberating productivity enhancer, others regard it as evidence of laziness. Moreover, automation’s reliance on existing data often homogenizes outcomes, curbing true innovation. As Schweitzer articulates, “AI can raise the baseline of creativity, but it diminishes the frequency of genuine breakthroughs.” In essence, it elevates competence across the board while simultaneously compressing the creative ceiling.
Proponents argue that automating routine tasks frees humans for more imaginative endeavors. Indeed, many side hustlers welcome AI’s ability to remove drudgery. Lisa Driskil, who humorously claims, “The only thing not for sale in my eBay store is my husband,” uses the technology for product descriptions and photo editing, greatly reducing her workload. For entrepreneurs like Ross Buhrdorf, CEO of ZenBusiness, AI functions as a time-saving assistant; his firm’s new tool, Velo, guides clients through administrative complexities such as taxes, licensing, and compliance. Yet sociologist Erin Hatton warns of a cost: widespread AI reliance could gradually weaken skill acquisition, particularly in creative professions where mastery arises from practice, feedback, and iteration. Editing a machine’s draft, she argues, rarely cultivates genuine craftsmanship. Furthermore, supervising AI’s imperfect outputs — effectively “checking the robot’s homework” — generates tedium rather than inspiration.
Jinjin Qian, Executive Vice President of Strategic Finance at Fiverr, observes distinct shifts in client behavior. Rather than commissioning projects from inception, many now use AI to create rough drafts — a blog post, a basic app, a first-cut video — then hire professionals merely to polish the result. Consequently, low-level job demand plummets. For clients, the logic is simple: delegate as much as possible to AI to conserve budget. Employers such as blockchain entrepreneur Guillermo Fernandes illustrate this trend vividly: after leveraging AI coding tools, his company replaced several human interns, retaining only one. Similarly, Carey Bentley, CEO of the productivity firm Lifehack Method, candidly admits her organization reduced staff after realizing AI could outperform underperforming contractors. “Every hire must yield at least triple their cost in value,” she asserts, urging peers to reskill proactively if their roles risk automation.
Ironically, both Fernandes and Bentley, now dependent on AI themselves, confront the same paradox they once imposed. Fernandes uses AI for legislative analysis, while Bentley has her coaches record sessions that generate automated follow-up summaries for clients — correspondence that, unbeknownst to recipients, is machine-written. They view these practices as harmless efficiency hacks, though arguably, they dilute perceived authenticity. Across the freelance spectrum, many recognize this precarious balance: they are, metaphorically, riding a tiger — aware of the danger but compelled to hang on.
Even journalists and analysts studying these transformations find themselves entangled. The author of this report, like countless professionals, occasionally uses AI for editorial assistance — reviewing openings, checking tone, or even trivial personal queries. The duality is unmistakable: AI enhances output quantity but casts doubt on lasting quality. Some individuals now produce newsletters or written platforms mainly to demonstrate technological proficiency rather than to connect meaningfully with readers. Still, there exist success stories, such as that of Kimberly Storin, chief marketing officer at Zoom and co-owner of a bespoke furniture business in Austin. Her family company employs AI to generate quotes, identify materials, and design prototypes, accelerating client proposals and refining operations. While AI occasionally errs — producing overestimated bids — even these missteps serve as valuable feedback, helping refine future outcomes.
In sum, artificial intelligence has indisputably expanded access to entrepreneurship and self-employment. It offers immediacy, efficiency, and affordability, lowering thresholds that once excluded novices. Yet the same process that raises the baseline also flattens the peak, shifting ambitions from excellence to adequacy. Researchers succinctly frame this new equilibrium: AI lifts most work to a competent six out of ten, but by doing so, it renders the rare nine or ten increasingly elusive. For the modern side hustler, success thus lies not in adopting AI blindly, but in mastering its integration — preserving the human spark that no algorithm can fully replicate.
Sourse: https://www.businessinsider.com/side-hustles-freelance-economy-ai-technology-cheap-income-pay-2025-10
